— from 1984, by George Orwell
I call it zerothink and I see it in most Americans. They accept the statements of the U.S. government just as gullibly as the citizens of Oceania accepted the statements of the Party, in Orwell's book. For example, they believe that the U.S. government never supported Saddam Hussein, that he has always been the enemy, merely because he is presently proclaimed to be evil. They also believe that General Musharif has always been a U.S. ally and that he wouldn't think of overthrowing a democratically elected government. They even believe that terrorists are more dangerous than politicians.
If Americans are so gullible about recent events, consider how gullible they must be about the more distant past. Consider the so-called Civil War. Among the false beliefs is the name itself. In the South that war is, or was, correctly called The War Between the States. Yet another deception is that slavery was illegal within the union at that time. In fact, anti-slavery laws were unconstitutional.
"Person" in that provision includes slaves. The northern states routinely violated it by refusing to return escaped slaves and by enacting legislation that freed slaves who escaped into non slave states. The abolition of slavery should have been accomplished by amending the Constitution, not by violating it. In the meantime, slavery was constitutional.
The mention of slavery at this late date might seem irrelevant. However, the fact is that slavery wasn't abolished. Only American zerothink has allowed the deception to succeed.
Consider the Fourteenth Amendment.
The meaning of jurisdiction is "power and control". Thus, citizens are under the power and control of the U.S. government. That sounds like a pretty good definition of slavery.
|So, with the enactment of the 14th amendment,
slavery became an aspect of citizenship. The only real change is
that, now, slavery is a government monopoly.
The deceptions go further into the past. The delegates to the Continental Congress asserted that governments are instituted to secure the rights of the people. I don't believe it. Governments are instituted to control people, not to secure their rights. The delegates to the Continental Congress also noted, correctly for once, that "mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
Just how evil does the U.S. government have to get before people will be motivated to abolish it? Does it need to convert every single right into a privilege and then charge a fee for the exercise of each and every one? Does it need to embrace force, coercion, tyranny, terror, and lies as instruments of policy? Does it need to use a permanent state of war as an excuse for endless repression? How insufferable does it have to get? I believe that the evils of the U.S. government are no longer sufferable. I believe that it should be abolished immediately. If the U.S. government arrests and punishes me for merely expressing such beliefs, then it will have proven, itself, that I am correct.
Sam Aurelius Milam III
• I think that more people are killed in this country by cops than by snipers. Why don't we have a media feeding frenzy when somebody is killed by the cops? Maybe it just isn't news.
• When the sniper in the Washington, D.C. area shot a thirteen-year-old boy, people were outraged, yet the economic sanctions on Iraq, largely promoted by the U.S. government, have been responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of young Iraqis. The Israelis, with U.S. government equipment and support, have killed hundreds of young Palestinians. Does anybody recognize the hypocrisy? Is anybody even thinking?
• I'll bet the executives at 7-Eleven, Inc. are sure happy that the 9/11 attacks didn't happen two months earlier.
• I recently saw a news report about a convention of Republican women. I didn't pay much attention except to notice that they had an entire convention center filled with only women. I couldn't help recalling the recent lamentation among women about the male-only membership in the Augusta National Golf Club. One woman whined, "It's the twenty-first century. We think it's time they moved into it." What would happen if we had a convention of Republican men? Does anybody recognize the hypocrisy? Is anybody thinking?
Letters to the Editor
As any reasonably informed individual knows, Saddam Hussein poses no immediate risk to any other country. However, if America invades Iraq then there is a significant probability that Saddam Hussein will retaliate with a smallpox attack on America. The only reasonable conclusion is that Bush wants to launch a biowarfare attack on Americans and Canadians.
The next message is in reply to question number 31 of Ron Paul's questions, printed last month: "Is it not true that a war against Iraq rejects the sentiments of the time-honored Treaty of Westphalia, nearly 400 years ago, that countries should never go into another for the purpose of regime change?"
This is an interesting point -- the Treaty of Westphalia is considered the foundation for modern diplomacy, and is taught as such in international relations classes. So the US is opening up new and possibly chaotic terrain here. Future historians may see this as a major change in the history of the world.
And as usual, 90+% of Americans sit back and watch their televisions and have no idea what is happening ...
— Joseph; Burbank, California
|Dear Sam, Greetings,
The terrorist-destroyers stole my typewriter (20th time) so, sorry, you'll have to try to decipher — I have hand damage so it gets quite bad. They confiscated all my files, legal cases, etc., so it sets me back years — which means my time is set back so many extra years now, that I have to curtail all letters, like this, sorry no choice....
As to the comments ... on sexuality vis-a-vis age, I tend to agree with most of your positions, & especially that gov't should not get to dictate or punish concerning these things, except possibly with rare exception — & that must be done only under great vigilance. I do disagree tho, (in other articles), on: I think it is perverse for anyone to seek to go around & video/photo genitals, etc. Sex is a wonderful thing, but I consider that type of focus a definite perversion of its exquisite value & blessings. I do not go around imposing that on others (so we agree there), but if I had time, I'd try to TEACH others why I believe this. I agree parents should be the "gov't" of their children....
Your concerns on p 1 of same Frontiersman, generated from my letter(s), re not publishing prisoners names: What is true for me, is not necessarily true for all CA prisoners, or other places (states/or fed). I have been a unique special targeted case since near the start; plus most prisoners never need to go to the parole bd. Their sentences are fixed. They don't need to be concerned. Also, while true the guards do read outgoing mail, & they are supposed to do so — at least to spot-glance at it, at whim, they are low on the totem pole & usually are to lazy to care, if it's not some outright crime-by-mail. When it's published, & Calif's more terroristic gov't branches are invoked (no doubt they analyze all newsletters like yours), that is the level of snooping we need to be concerned about. And I already have always believed they list ALL mail incoming toyou (who it come from) & especially tag it when from prisoners. It is then somewhat easy for them to link between the prisoner return address-name, & the published articles. I realize there is some risk in all this, but it is minimized if I'm not as a flag waved, I operate by pen name, like you once said, camouflage is sometimes the best defense against this bestial enemy. My main point being, you no doubt have not caused any problem for any prisoner writing you, to the contrary, most prisoners want notoriety, as it's their 15 minutes of fame....
Before the terrorists (I won't glamorize them by calling them gestapo), took all your previous newsletters, (I'll get them back — so don't be concerned on that & it had nothing to do with them, they targeted my "LEGAL WORK": the worst contraband one could have in CA prison), I finished them & was trying to find time to respond. They are tremendous work — tho I miss BUCK HUNTER — he was the best for laughs. Anyway, to sum it up. I did not think it could be done, but your short story on THE CONDITIONING (I forgot the title) [Lady's Man — editor] was so brilliant, I did not think it could be done. In a few short pages, you somehow captured the essence of all the horror, hell-ringing, teaching genius of George Orwell's "1984" — but in its own right as a unique, powerful work unto itself. Talented people often have many callings, and I assume you are fulfilling one of them by your writings. That was the epitome of all your great writing I'd read, & fittingly it came right about the end of all you had sent me — which I read in order. It was classic in every great sense. I believe this Sam — & I already perceive you don't agree, but that is OK, as we've discussed: I believe there is a final Kingdom (gov't) coming which is PERFECT in every sense. Only those who "right" pursuant to its perfect laws, as designed into the [illegible word] of all things per Creator, will be there. No one else will be allowed, they will have been eliminated. No mortal man can judge this, only the Creator & His [illegible word] can. We need brilliant minds & good hearts like you in the kingdom. I want you to be there. I am not a preacher, nor a fanatic. This is basic, simple, reality stuff. I won't preach to you, but little by little I will hope that you will, in the course of your tremendous diligent searchings of mind & heart, come to see what I have come to find about the very real final "government", with total freedom for everyone, no one bothered or oppressed by anyone, right here on Earth....
Thanks for so much. Blessing to you & yours.
... I didn't find much in the latest FRONTIERSMAN, which was almost all letters. I do like reading it. Please keep sending it.
— Rodney; Tatamagouche, Nova Scotia
Buck Hunter Shoots Off His Mouth
How do you feel about Palestinians?
I don't know anybody who lives in a palace but I suppose they're pretty much like the rest of us, just ordinary folks.
Cancellations — If you don't want to keep receiving this newsletter, print REFUSED, RETURN TO SENDER above your name and address, cross out your name and address, and return the newsletter. When I receive it, I'll terminate your subscription. You may also cancel by letter, e-mail, carrier pigeon, or any other method that gets the message to me.
Back Issues — Back issues or extra copies of this newsletter are available upon request.
Reprint Policy — Permission is hereby granted to reproduce this newsletter in its entirety or to reproduce material from it, provided that the reproduction is accurate and that proper credit is given. Please note that I do not have the authority to give permission to reprint material that I have reprinted from other sources. For that permission, you must go to the original source. I would appreciate receiving a courtesy copy of any document or publication in which you reprint my material.
Submissions — I solicit letters, articles, and cartoons for the newsletter, but I don't pay for them. Short items are more likely to be printed. I suggest that letters and articles be shorter than 500 words, but that's flexible depending on space available and the content of the piece. I give credit for all items printed unless the author specifies otherwise.
Payment — This newsletter isn't for sale. If you care to make a voluntary contribution, you may do so. The continued existence of the newsletter will depend, in part, on such contributions. I accept cash, U.S. postage stamps, prepaid telephone cards, and so forth. I will accept checks or money orders only by prior arrangement. I don't accept anything that requires me to provide ID or a signature to receive it. In case anybody is curious, I also accept gold, silver, platinum, etc. I'm sure you get the idea.
— Sam Aurelius Milam III, editor